| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Memory upgrade slows Microsoft Vista right down | |
|
||
| Time: 01:14 EST/06:14 GMT | News Source: the inquirer | Posted By: Kenneth van Surksum | ||
|
Vista has rather an illogical performance rating tool. It tests some of your computer subsystems and gives you a total score that can give you an indication whether or not your machine is fit for Vista. It gives you a "score" called Windows Experience Index (WEI). If we were on the planet Vulcan someone would be shot for this performance rating system as Microsoft will super confuse people with it. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 150 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:34:26 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 8556 (12.217.111.92) at 10/16/2006 12:23:29 PM |
| The Windows Vista Experience score should be dropped. Just show all the scores with a simple explanation of what MS believes each score means. Or, drop the whole stupid concept. I'll stick with Sandra. |
| #2 By 23275 (68.17.42.38) at 10/16/2006 1:28:14 PM |
|
Please read up on SuperFetch and how the OS will rebuild large portions of that which monitor how each user works - the system will appear to "thrash" for about 45 minutes, following upgrades like this. Afterwhich, it will improve dramatically.
Also, please see articles for Ready Drive [as tey relate to on drive and on main board non-volatile memory], and ready Boost - each deigned to take advantge of what SuperFetch and Vista can do. After building and testing many configurations for Vista - latops, media systems and workstations, I can share that using these technologies properly, can provide a system that responds nearly instantly to a wide variety of events and uses. For example, you can turn your system on remotely and it will come up, or back to full use in seconds [about as fast as a stand alone DVD player]; it can launch applications immediately; it can do so and use less power and generate less noise and heat - even on older laptops. The socing system is actually designed to make it easy for people to buy software - e.g., x, y or z program recommends a score of 3 or higher.... - so Mom, or Dad buying for a teen can know if a software title will likely run well, or not. I say, read up on these technologies and learn how to manage them and avoid making assumptions that are not accurate. |
| #3 By 2459 (69.22.124.202) at 10/16/2006 3:47:46 PM |
|
I say, read up on these technologies and learn how to manage them and avoid making assumptions that are not accurate.
Too true. BTW, I didn't feel like wasting time on this, but from a glance it seems the Inq used slower Kingston RAM to upgrade their OCZ. If it's indeed slower, that explains the decrease in score as latency increases. There are similar details with the other tests that involve comparisons other than simplistic "this is bigger so it must be better" comparisons. |
| #4 By 23275 (68.17.42.38) at 10/16/2006 4:04:15 PM |
|
#3, Yeah, and it was off-speed across the board and didn't explain a dern thing ref how it was matched - e.g., number and type of channels used, or near enough detail about how, or in how many configurations it was [if any] tested. I mean, it is quite easy to structure a test to produce less than optimal results.
The larger questions for me are these: 1) why does a self-proclaimed Microsoft detractor think they will not be challenged on this, and 2) How does the article, less at least some qualification, make it into circulation out here? |
| #5 By 7754 (216.160.8.41) at 10/16/2006 6:17:07 PM |
|
I think the author is right in one way about the memory--2 GB will definitely be better than 1 GB with Vista in just about every situation. But the score is based on memory operations/second, not the size. You could conceivably get a better score with 256 MB of RAM than with 4 GB, if that's the case.
I would imagine that system requirements for software would then be able to say "you need X amount of RAM and Y for a memory score." This is a bit confusing to average customers, though... but then again, I'm not sure you could easily combine the two. I wonder if any software would go as far as saying "You need X memory operations/second," though. |
| #6 By 23275 (68.17.42.38) at 10/16/2006 7:47:33 PM |
|
Well... one thing for sure... when evaluating Vista [5600, and especially 5744], give the machine time and don't make assumptions right away - I made this mistake early on with 5600. Give SuperFetch time to work in - especially when upgrading over XP.
Once used for at least three days, add a fast USB pen drive - say 2 GB and set up Ready Boost on it. Wait another two days and a couple of reboots [intentional restarts]. *test assumes you have at least 1 GB main systems RAM and a little more modern proc - say a 2.8 GHz Pent 4 with HT. If you are using a large amount of RAM, set the systems swap to "System Managed" and reboot. ***Old AWE, PAE settings are irrelevant - there is no boot.ini as in XP. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 150 Last | Next |
The time now is
6:34:26 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
